BoxRec

No agreement on Leonard's repeated fouling of Hagler, though --- to be fair

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The circus tent ring and the 15 rounds. The ones that everyone has been discussing since I mentioned them initially. Do you read other posts or just a few words?

So two things...

1. Having the fight at the same distance as Hagler's last two fights - what a crime!

2. Having a large ring - Yes, this suited Leonard more, but it was within the rules set out by the Vegas commision.

Once again. Hagler agreed to these stipulations. So what's your problem?

I could state my problem with Leonard 800 times and you obviously would never be able to understand it. You need to mix some reading in with all of your talking. You're the one with the problem.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

orbtastic wrote:Bigger draw but took the smaller purse, tells you all you need to know about this fight.

Also worth noting is that Hagler had the choice on judges, he turned down one judge (Ken Morita I think) in favour of Jose Juan Guerra, who famously scored it a lot wider to SRL than anyone else.

Leonard did agree the smaller purse ($11m if memory serves) - although he made millions on the back of the win.

A lot of the Leonard haters refuse to acknowledge that Marvin and Ray came to an agreement.

Hater is the love cry of the nuthugger. The fact that you can't admit Leonard was always seeking an advantage in negotiations, just like Pacquiao is doing now, is more laughable than any of your retarded posts.

Leonard took a smaller purse?

For once in his life his opponent had a more lucrative option on the table than he did. The Hearns rematch was all ready to roll. Hagler would have made just as much money there. But he wanted to fight Leonard.

I watched it again not to long ago.

I think Sugar won the fight.

I think it was of Hagler's own doing, by miscalculating in the early rounds.

Just one of those things. But I really feel Hager has/had no one to blame but himself. If he would have fought Ray the way he fought Tommy, I'm guessing there would have been a different outcome. But he seemed to choose the approach he used with Duran and it didn't work well either time. I've read that some think he was intimidated by these two. Maybe so. Perhaps that factored in, for both fights may simply have been bad ring generalship. It barely scraped him by with Duran, and just didnt work with Sugar.

Prime vs Prime? Best version of each showing up? I find it hard to imagine that Ray wins.

However I have no proof of my imaginative claim.

Monzon faced with either of these guys at any time in his active career would have put a stop to Tommy, Sugar Ray and Roberto....oh and Willie Monroe X2.

Yep no proof there either, but I've got my detectives out there askin' questions and collecting info.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The circus tent ring and the 15 rounds. The ones that everyone has been discussing since I mentioned them initially. Do you read other posts or just a few words?

So two things...

1. Having the fight at the same distance as Hagler's last two fights - what a crime!

2. Having a large ring - Yes, this suited Leonard more, but it was within the rules set out by the Vegas commision.

Once again. Hagler agreed to these stipulations. So what's your problem?

I could state my problem with Leonard 800 times and you obviously would never be able to understand it. You need to mix some reading in with all of your talking. You're the one with the problem.

You've stated you problem. I just happen to think it's complete tosh!

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

orbtastic wrote:Bigger draw but took the smaller purse, tells you all you need to know about this fight.

Also worth noting is that Hagler had the choice on judges, he turned down one judge (Ken Morita I think) in favour of Jose Juan Guerra, who famously scored it a lot wider to SRL than anyone else.

Leonard did agree the smaller purse ($11m if memory serves) - although he made millions on the back of the win.

A lot of the Leonard haters refuse to acknowledge that Marvin and Ray came to an agreement.

Hater is the love cry of the nuthugger. The fact that you can't admit Leonard was always seeking an advantage in negotiations, just like Pacquiao is doing now, is more laughable than any of your retarded posts.

Leonard took a smaller purse?

For once in his life his opponent had a more lucrative option on the table than he did. The Hearns rematch was all ready to roll. Hagler would have made just as much money there. But he wanted to fight Leonard.

Of course I will admit that Leonard was seeking an advantage during the negotiations. What is wrong with seeking an edge?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:No agreement on Leonard's repeated fouling of Hagler, though --- to be fair

LOL. We agree again. I've said before on the boards that Leonard is one of the dirtiest fighters in the history of the game.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote: So two things...

1. Having the fight at the same distance as Hagler's last two fights - what a crime!

2. Having a large ring - Yes, this suited Leonard more, but it was within the rules set out by the Vegas commision.

Once again. Hagler agreed to these stipulations. So what's your problem?

I could state my problem with Leonard 800 times and you obviously would never be able to understand it. You need to mix some reading in with all of your talking. You're the one with the problem.

You've stated you problem. I just happen to think it's complete tosh!

The only problem in this thread is you.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote: Leonard did agree the smaller purse ($11m if memory serves) - although he made millions on the back of the win.

A lot of the Leonard haters refuse to acknowledge that Marvin and Ray came to an agreement.

Hater is the love cry of the nuthugger. The fact that you can't admit Leonard was always seeking an advantage in negotiations, just like Pacquiao is doing now, is more laughable than any of your retarded posts.

Leonard took a smaller purse?

For once in his life his opponent had a more lucrative option on the table than he did. The Hearns rematch was all ready to roll. Hagler would have made just as much money there. But he wanted to fight Leonard.

Of course I will admit that Leonard was seeking an advantage during the negotiations. What is wrong with seeking an edge?

It is the reason that I hate him. You're the one dragging it on and on like I am saying it's the reason Leonard won. I'll ask you again, do you actually read posts?

It's a rough business, a fighter has every right to protect themselves in any way they see fit. I am under no obligation to like it and cheer it on. My favorite fighters are Ezzard charles, Thomas Hearns, Saad Muhammad,Holyfield, Duran, Morales, frazier, etc... They aren't men that looked for an edge outside the ring, with the exception of juicing, or balked at rematches of great fights. It's my preference, you will have to learn to live with it.

Like I said, great performance from leonard and he won the fight imo. The guys I listed would have fought hagler again, no doubt about it.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote: Hater is the love cry of the nuthugger. The fact that you can't admit Leonard was always seeking an advantage in negotiations, just like Pacquiao is doing now, is more laughable than any of your retarded posts.

Leonard took a smaller purse?

For once in his life his opponent had a more lucrative option on the table than he did. The Hearns rematch was all ready to roll. Hagler would have made just as much money there. But he wanted to fight Leonard.

Of course I will admit that Leonard was seeking an advantage during the negotiations. What is wrong with seeking an edge?

It is the reason that I hate him. You're the one dragging it on and on like I am saying it's the reason Leonard won. I'll ask you again, do you actually read posts?

It's a rough business, a fighter has every right to protect themselves in any way they see fit. I am under no obligation to like it and cheer it on. My favorite fighters are Ezzard charles, Thomas Hearns, Saad Muhammad,Holyfield, Duran, Morales, frazier, etc... They aren't men that looked for an edge outside the ring, with the exception of juicing, or balked at rematches of great fights. It's my preference, you will have to learn to live with it.

Like I said, great performance from leonard and he won the fight imo. The guys I listed would have fought hagler again, no doubt about it.

Hearns was my favourite fighterr of that period along with Laarry Holmes. So I've not a Leonard lover.

I think it's pretty childish to HATE someone for negotiating.

I think you calling anything childish is TOSH!

Plenty of other reasons, being a complete phony, battering his wife, making 7up commercials like the all american Dad while you ignore your son. He was a great fighter and a POS. His maniacal fans like yourself are hilarious with their weeping dialogues of why everyone should love your sugar bear.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

I think you calling anything childish is TOSH!

Plenty of other reasons, being a complete phony, battering his wife, making 7up commercials like the all american Dad while you ignore your son. He was a great fighter and a POS. His maniacal fans like yourself are hilarious with their weeping dialogues of why everyone should love your sugar bear.

I am not a 'maniacal fan'. I don't love SRL. You're making aiming assumptions at me and missing by a mile.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

I think you calling anything childish is TOSH!

Plenty of other reasons, being a complete phony, battering his wife, making 7up commercials like the all american Dad while you ignore your son. He was a great fighter and a POS. His maniacal fans like yourself are hilarious with their weeping dialogues of why everyone should love your sugar bear.

I am not a 'maniacal fan'. I don't love SRL. You're making aiming assumptions at me and missing by a mile.

Right, you're a Hearns fan arguing semantics in favor of leonard. Whatever, you're definitely a waste of time.

No offense taken, I was talking about being difficult to negotiate with, but I thought Mugabi would throw that out there if i didn't include it myself. Ooops, did I say Mugabi? I meant KeithMoonshangover, LOL.

Ezzard wrote:

Rocky Balboa wrote:Leonard was given the decision & that is set in stone!

I'm not going to argue over who I thought did or didn't win because in all honesty, its academic now!

However, I would appreciate it if someone could shed some light on a couple of things:

1. That Leonard would NOT agree to a 15 round fight?

2. That Leonard put other conditions which benefited him & not Hagler?

15 rounds would have suited Hagler BUT I believe both Hearns and Mugabi were scheduled for 12, so it's not as simple as saying Leonard screwed him.

At the time Ray was coming back off a long lay-off and was an unknown quantity. Nobody knew what he had left (if anything). Hagler had to be a big favourite but it was Hagler who was more worn out than Leonard.

Hagler wanted the fight no matter what. I think he just thought that sooner or later he'd get to Leonard. And to be fair he nearly did. Ray looks totally spent at the end.

Mugabi and Hearns vs Hagler would of made no difference if it was scheduled over 12 rounds because neither of them would of made it, it would not have made a difference what so ever.

lucaselrey wrote:

Ezzard wrote:

Rocky Balboa wrote:Leonard was given the decision & that is set in stone!

I'm not going to argue over who I thought did or didn't win because in all honesty, its academic now!

However, I would appreciate it if someone could shed some light on a couple of things:

1. That Leonard would NOT agree to a 15 round fight?

2. That Leonard put other conditions which benefited him & not Hagler?

15 rounds would have suited Hagler BUT I believe both Hearns and Mugabi were scheduled for 12, so it's not as simple as saying Leonard screwed him.

At the time Ray was coming back off a long lay-off and was an unknown quantity. Nobody knew what he had left (if anything). Hagler had to be a big favourite but it was Hagler who was more worn out than Leonard.

Hagler wanted the fight no matter what. I think he just thought that sooner or later he'd get to Leonard. And to be fair he nearly did. Ray looks totally spent at the end.

Mugabi and Hearns vs Hagler would of made no difference if it was scheduled over 12 rounds because neither of them would of made it, it would not have made a difference what so ever.

Obviously not. The point I'm trying to make is that people always bang on about Leonard manipulating Hagler into a 12 round fight. But Hagler's last two fights were scheduled for the same distance. Therefore, Hagler was only agreeing to something he had already agreed to in his last two fights.

I really don't like the manipulating...

It's become more common today with Pac, Mayweather and even Williams in recent times making stipulations to load the dice.

But I would have forgiven Leonard if he'd have granted Hagler a rematch. Or if he'd have rematched Hearns before he looked finished.

It wouldn't even have been so bad if he'd have not re-matched but never fought again. But to turn down the re-match, claim to be retired and then come out again...

I feel that's the biggest stink.

Ezzard wrote:I really don't like the manipulating...

It's become more common today with Pac, Mayweather and even Williams in recent times making stipulations to load the dice.

But I would have forgiven Leonard if he'd have granted Hagler a rematch. Or if he'd have rematched Hearns before he looked finished.

It wouldn't even have been so bad if he'd have not re-matched but never fought again. But to turn down the re-match, claim to be retired and then come out again...

I feel that's the biggest stink.

I agree with what you're saying on the Hearns rematch. It's a shame Hearns overtrained so much for the first Leonard fight. I think he may well have won that fight if he hadn't. Although I think Leonard was as finished as Hearns by the time thay had a rematch.

I do think Tommy did beat him in the rematch, I don't care what the judges say.

I've read a few different versions of a Hagler rematch. I've read that Leonard offered Hagler a rematch, but Hagler wouldn't return his calls.

BoxBuzz wrote:I watched it again not to long ago.

I think Sugar won the fight.

I think it was of Hagler's own doing, by miscalculating in the early rounds.

Just one of those things. But I really feel Hager has/had no one to blame but himself. If he would have fought Ray the way he fought Tommy, I'm guessing there would have been a different outcome. But he seemed to choose the approach he used with Duran and it didn't work well either time. I've read that some think he was intimidated by these two. Maybe so. Perhaps that factored in, for both fights may simply have been bad ring generalship. It barely scraped him by with Duran, and just didnt work with Sugar.

Prime vs Prime? Best version of each showing up? I find it hard to imagine that Ray wins.

However I have no proof of my imaginative claim.

Monzon faced with either of these guys at any time in his active career would have put a stop to Tommy, Sugar Ray and Roberto....oh and Willie Monroe X2.

Yep no proof there either, but I've got my detectives out there askin' questions and collecting info.

Couldn't agree more re: Monzon. People who didn't see him live and only know him from the grainy video on YouTube 35 years after he retired don't understand how good he was.

I was a huge fan of Hagler in the 70s and 80s and when I saw the Leonard fight I thought the judges gave SRL too many points for style and didn't give Hagler enough points for substance. When I rewatched it many years later, I realized I was wrong. As you said, Hagler gave away the first half of the fight and Leonard won. IMO SRL made Hagler look old, and it was probably best that he never fought again.
The Hagler of, say, 1981 vs the Leonard of 1981 would have been amazing.

Ezzard wrote:

Rocky Balboa wrote:Leonard was given the decision & that is set in stone!

I'm not going to argue over who I thought did or didn't win because in all honesty, its academic now!

However, I would appreciate it if someone could shed some light on a couple of things:

1. That Leonard would NOT agree to a 15 round fight?

2. That Leonard put other conditions which benefited him & not Hagler?

15 rounds would have suited Hagler BUT I believe both Hearns and Mugabi were scheduled for 12, so it's not as simple as saying Leonard screwed him.

At the time Ray was coming back off a long lay-off and was an unknown quantity. Nobody knew what he had left (if anything). Hagler had to be a big favourite but it was Hagler who was more worn out than Leonard.

Hagler wanted the fight no matter what. I think he just thought that sooner or later he'd get to Leonard. And to be fair he nearly did. Ray looks totally spent at the end.

In respect of Leonard being totally spent at the end, if there would have been a rematch within say, twelve months, do you think Hagler would have evened the score?

We could never find out, leonard wouldn't even discuss it until well after a year had passed by.

Rocky Balboa wrote:

Ezzard wrote:

Rocky Balboa wrote:Leonard was given the decision & that is set in stone!

I'm not going to argue over who I thought did or didn't win because in all honesty, its academic now!

However, I would appreciate it if someone could shed some light on a couple of things:

1. That Leonard would NOT agree to a 15 round fight?

2. That Leonard put other conditions which benefited him & not Hagler?

15 rounds would have suited Hagler BUT I believe both Hearns and Mugabi were scheduled for 12, so it's not as simple as saying Leonard screwed him.

At the time Ray was coming back off a long lay-off and was an unknown quantity. Nobody knew what he had left (if anything). Hagler had to be a big favourite but it was Hagler who was more worn out than Leonard.

Hagler wanted the fight no matter what. I think he just thought that sooner or later he'd get to Leonard. And to be fair he nearly did. Ray looks totally spent at the end.

In respect of Leonard being totally spent at the end, if there would have been a rematch within say, twelve months, do you think Hagler would have evened the score?

I find it hard to believe Hagler wouldn't have won a rematch. Ray would be a known quantity the second time round and Marvin would have pressed the fight harder. Who knows though, another 12 months and Hagler would have been even more worn out.

I don't think Hagler would have been worn out. He was not that old and had not been in that many "ring wars."

Still, I find it hard to believe that Hagler would have won a rematch. Leonard would have been a lot less rusty and would have been more used to the extra weight.

How about if the rematch was at 154? Wouldn't that be fair since in Leonard had to make the "concession" to fight at Hagler's weight of 160?

I said this tongue in cheek of course. Obviously Hagler would never have fought at 154. I was just showing how ridiculaus the crybaby complaints that are made about the "concessions" that Hagler gave away before their fight really are.